MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255845462 · doi:10.1088/0266-5611/25/1/010201

Inverse Problems' 25th year of publication

2008· article· en· W4255845462 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInverse Problems · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicNumerical methods in inverse problems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInverse problemAudience measurementInverseSubject (documents)Quarter (Canadian coin)RadarMathematicsLibrary scienceComputer scienceHistoryPolitical scienceTelecommunicationsMathematical analysisLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2009 is Inverse Problems' 25th year of publication. In this quarter-century, the journal has established itself as the premier publication venue for inverse problems research. It has matured from its beginnings as a niche journal serving the emerging field of inverse and ill-posed problems to a monthly publication in 2009 covering all aspects of a well-established, vibrant and still-expanding subject. Along with its core readership of pure and applied mathematicians and physicists,Inverse Problems has become widely known across a broad range of researchers in areas such as geophysics, optics, radar, acoustics, communication theory, signal processing and medical imaging, amongst others.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.143
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it